Apple asked a bankruptcy judge if it could file a patent infringement lawsuit against Kodak yesterday

As if repeatedly attacking Samsung, HTC and Motorola Mobility with patent infringement lawsuits wasn't enough, Apple is now looking to kick Kodak while it's down with digital camera, printer and digital picture frame-related infringement suits as well.

Apple's Valentine's Day present to Kodak was a filing in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York yesterday, where Apple said it is filing patent infringement claims against Kodak with the International Trade Commission (ITC) as well as the U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Apple asked a bankruptcy judge for permission to sue Kodak first, despite the fact that filing for bankruptcy doesn't protect Kodak from infringement suits.

Apple had claimed before that it created a digital camera in the 1990's along with Kodak, but Kodak supposedly moved ahead with patenting the camera on its own. Apple had filed the case with the U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington, where the ITC rejected Apple's claims. Yesterday, Apple said in the filing that it wanted to move the case to Manhattan.

Kodak sent a patent infringement lawsuit back Apple's way last month, which also targeted Motorola Mobility. However, Apple argued that the ITC shouldn't even bother with the claims because of Kodak's bankruptcy filing and the sale of its patents. Kodak responded, saying that bankruptcy isn't stopping Kodak from expanding its digital imaging technology.

"Apple should not be using the bankruptcy to seek to disrupt Kodak's enforcement of its patents given that infringers like Apple, who continue to violate Kodak's intellectual property rights and refuse to properly compensate it, have contributed to Kodak's current circumstances," said Kodak.

Apple has been on a lawsuit crusade over the past year, mainly targeting Samsung. In April 2011, Apple began attacking Samsung with several patent infringement lawsuits in regards to the South Korean electronics maker's Galaxy S 4G, Epic 4G, Nexus smartphones and the Galaxy Tab 10.1. Apple claimed that these products imitate the iPhone and iPad.

Apple even successfully banned the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia and Germany, but Samsung finally lifted the ban in Australia in December 2011. Samsung is still having troubles in Germany, however.

Oh, and as for your continued insistence that I must be buying AMD instead of Intel so that I can feel "morally superior" - which is a phrase and sentiment you manufactured yourself, and keep repeating...

As noted Intel is a convicted criminal organization. Period. Matter of public record.

You also keep insisting that AMD is "inferior" to Intel. The truth is that at any given price point, it's about the same. And it categorically makes no subjective difference to the user...there is nothing inherently "inferior" about a PC with an AMD CPU vs. an Intel CPU.

I choose not to support them because of that. You assert that no one should ever choose not to do business with someone because they are a convicted criminal.

Let's say that you have 2 options to buy a new car. Dealership #1 sells cars you'd like to own, but that company was recently found to be selling crack to elementary school kids as extra income. Dealership #2 also has some cars that would appeal to you...and they happen to have no criminal record at all.

You insist that the selling crack to kids bit is irrelevant...that it should never be considered in your purchase decision. If that's your position, and it seems that it is, then you are an inferior human being and your opinion is invalid. Well...but that is something we already knew.

Note that back in the day, when Via/Cyrix was still around, I wasn't generally offering anyone a machine built with a C3 processor...since it was a noticeably slower part at any price point. That isn't true with AMD. Hasn't been since before the K6-2.